Paterson invokes cloak of the First Amendment

At the same press conference following the leaders’ meeting, another reporter asked: “Given that, as you’ve said, we in the press know who the source is, are you now saying since you have now condemned what that source said – this person in your administration – are you saying this person is not trustworthy? And if this is the issue – that your staffer is just going around saying things that you don’t know about – what are you going to do to control your administration? Isn’t this a lack of discipline?”

Paterson responded:

“I think that the question calls for a number of conclusions that I can’t make. And general information about how I’m handling this is such that I’ve already answered. I’ve already answered.”

Except that he has made those conclusions. Let’s break it down:

The press does know who the source(s) is/are: How do we know this? Because nearly every member of the LCA print press corps printed quotes from a “source close to the governor” making similar allegations against Kennedy, in almost identical language. That included the New York Times, the New York Post, the New York Daily News, Newsday, the Buffalo News, the AP, and the Times Union. How each outlet reported that information varied throughout the day. Here’s what we wrote, using the information provided by the source.

Paterson has condemned what the source said: from the quote in the previous post, ” I condemn all the rumors.”

To the conclusion that “your staffer is just going around saying things that you don’t know about,” I guess Paterson could say that he can’t make that conclusion, because he says he doesn’t know who the source is. But a number of outlets have confirmed that it was a Paterson aide that leaked the information. So it comes down to the governor’s word against the word of a number of capitol reporters (who happen to compete against each other on a daily basis).

When pressed by another reporter about how people inside the governor’s office had confirmed that Paterson himself signed off on the attacks, Paterson said: “I don’t know that.”

It’s very interesting that Paterson invoked a supposed reporters’ First Amendment right to keep sources confidential. This is what he said:

I cannot know – I don’t have any information about these types of attacks. Other than to say that in this situation, and those of you who are in the media are well aware of this. That you have the first amendment right to protect your sources. You also have the right, if you think your sources are wrong, not to print the information. But I will leave it to your discretion what you do with anonymous information of this source. But for me to try and hunt them down, I think is just adding to what has already been a difficult process.

First of all, reporters don’t have a First Amendment right to protect our sources. Just ask Judith Miller. If we had a federal shield law, then we would be protected under the law to protect our sources.

But generally, reporters do believe that we have the obligation to protect our sources, in the name of keeping open the flow of information so that we can, in theory, better report the truth.

Paterson knows full well that the reporters on this story won’t give up their sources in this case, even when it is the very proof needed to bring out the truth.

It’s a sad irony that the very principle that is intended to protect the public’s “right to know” will be the thing that strangles the truth from seeing the light of day.

One thing we do know – this sort of confusion over the truth seems to happen an awful lot with this particular governor – in a short nine months. Let’s review:

There was the one about whether or not Paterson said mean things about NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg. (Which prompted this column from the Post, with the headline “Tell the truth gov”)

Then there was that bit about whether or not Paterson or his aides offered Sen. Darrel Aubertine a job running the New York Power Authority.

There was the one about whether or not Paterson made a promise to the Senate GOP to stay out of the Senate fight in November. The Senate Republicans say he made a promise; Paterson said he never did.

I’m sure that there are others that I can’t remember at the moment…please feel free to let me know of others and I’ll update the post.

So ultimately it is a question of who the public will trust – reporters, or the governor?